Ers Versus Ologists – The Secret Link Between Feminists And Serial Killers
Top flight business executives and serial killers have two things in common. The Warrior Gene and zero frontal lobe activity. The Warrior Gene makes you more likely to take risky decisions and zero frontal lobe activity makes empathy virtually impossible. Very useful traits in both careers. In short, top flight business executives and serial killers are both examples of psychopaths.
There is a great deal concern about the lack of female representation in high profile jobs. And this is undoubtedly due in part to the Old Boys’ Network and the Glass Ceiling. But it’s also partly due to the fact that there are just far fewer female psychopaths than male ones. So many women, and we’re talking highly capable, driven and talented women, start climbing the corporate ladder and eventually just give up. Not because they’re not up to the job – they are – but because spending long working days with a bunch of amoral nutcases is a bit of a headfuck. And not something that any sensible person would want to do for very long, no matter how tempting the financial rewards.
In the old days, men went out to work and women stayed at home and looked after kids. This was a very efficient system and everyone knew what they were supposed to do. But it wasn’t very fulfilling for anyone concerned. It was the emotional equivalent of living on gruel and pottage for your whole life. Everyone was sick of it, even most of the men if they were being honest, and things had to change.
And change they did. Two world wars had already seen women taking men’s jobs and being more than a little disenchanted by being made to give them back when the wars were over. The status quo was restored, but it was a fragile one. And eventually it was shattered by an unstoppable force. The Sixties.
Women wanted equality and they wanted it now. But it was the Sixties at the end of the day. And the model for feminism was originally rather utopian one. All the dope and free love and lentil casserole meant that the feminist ideal was one of equality for all, male and female. Women having high profile careers if they wanted them and men staying at home and looking after the kids if that’s what they wanted. A big, world wide commune where no one judges you for breaking the traditional roles. A great march forward into a future where men and women help each other do whatever they needed to be true to their individual hopes and dreams. It was a beautiful idea.
Sadly, like most beautiful ideas, human nature would not let it work. The fuzzy purple haze of the 1960s evaporated and revealed the swinging meathook realities of the grim 1970s. Worldwide instability due to rising oil prices. Industrial unrest. Rampant inflation. There was no time for men and women to be marching anywhere side by side. This was about survival. Everyone muddled through it as best they could, and there were many changes and victories along the way. You’ve probably all seen “Made In Dagenham”, so I won’t go into too much detail.
Of course a great many of these victories have been own goals. The problem with feminism is that it’s still such a middle class thing. Most people, in Britain at least, are still paid on the clock. They work in factories and shops and supermarkets. Male or female, if you are an “Operative” or “General Assistant”, you are paid by the hour and the Unions ensure that the hourly rate is the same for everybody. So when we are talking about the disparity between what men and women are paid, we are talking about salaries. And this is where Education rears its ugly head. Particularly Further and Higher Education.
Making Further and Higher Education more girl friendly via coursework and continuous assessment has meant that young women are now getting more and better degrees than their male counterparts. Even though I think this approach does little to prepare anyone for the cut and thrust of working life, complaining about that fact is missing the point. If you are set an academic challenge as a man and you fail to rise to it, that’s your tough shit. The offside rule has seen many changes over the years and yes, everyone scratches their heads and grumbles a bit, but ultimately you grit your teeth and get on with it. Academically, the girls have been kicking the boys’ arses for twenty years or more. Simple fact.
Another simple fact is that after that, it all goes wrong for the ladies. The freshly minted graduates emerge from the University press and then the fun begins. The girls, with their better results and the usefulness of their perceived innate talents such as empathy and multi-tasking , get the pick of the best starting positions. For the year or two they still outperform and out earn the chaps. Then by time everyone’s hit 25, the fellas start overtaking and once everyone’s got to 30, the ladies are dropping out of the race like flies. The men earn more money and the women’s careers stall.
I’ve lost count of the number of articles I’ve read bemoaning this fact. Though most of these articles were in The Daily Mail to be fair. But what these articles fail to mention is that many of the women who “Drop Out” actually start businesses of their own. And I fail to see how Feminism and womankind loses out by this. It seems like a pretty smart tactic to me. Take a quick dip in the Shark Tank, survive and use what you’ve learned for your own purposes and profit rather than boosting the bottom line of some faceless corporation.
Of course, many of the boys drop out too. This is in part down to the fact that there is a myth that you have to be clever to get into University. You have to have an IQ of about 130 to get into Mensa. And I mean just scrape your way into Mensa. The average IQ of a British undergraduate is 102. Average intelligence is 100. Which, statistics being what they are, means there are many people studying for degrees in Britain who are of well below average intelligence. And don’t get too smug about that America. Yes, your undergraduates are cleverer, but not by much. The average IQ of your undergraduates is 104. Luckily, you don’t need innate smarts to pass most degrees. It just takes hard work and determination.
That said, these facts do seem to indicate that there are a great many people going through the whole University/big business mill who really shouldn’t be. The problem is that everyone wants to be an “Ologist” rather than an “Er”. A Sociologist rather than a plain old Baker, for example. A Criminologist rather than a plain old Butcher. A Scientologist rather than a plain old nutter. That kind of thing. There must be many thirty something men who are scraping livings as mediocre public servants when they could be driving around in flash cars and living in big houses because they would have made top notch 24hr plumbers.
The nub of the matter is that “Ologists” study things and that “Ers” actually make things and do things. There are young people, male and female, who are good at making things and doing things. If we encouraged them to follow that path, instead of convincing them waste thousands of pounds spending three years writing essays, then the world would be a much more sensible, productive and comfortable place. And the laws of the market place might make hand crafted sausages and 24hr Plumbers that tiny bit more affordable.
© Copyright Michael Grimes 2013